Having read Richard Carrier’s two new books “Proving History,” and “On The Historicity of Jesus” I say wow! It appears to me to be the interesting case now that there are many more scholars stepping up to the plate and saying the Gospels are either wholly fabricated or else there is so much in them that is fabricated that it is hard to know if there is anything historical in them. Geze Vermes books deal with this. Robert M. Price deals with this in numerous books, John Dominick Crossan says this. Randall Helms says this. Burton Mack says this. And of course, now that the so-called “New Atheists” have come out boldly, and it appears many other authors are getting savvy to how to test the documents and writing about it, that the ideal of historicity is being severely challenged. It will be interesting to bring this all together. For now, it appears to me to be a new trend that is gaining ground rather speedily. And the fascinating thing is the evidences that are brought out are quite strong. It makes for interesting reading if nothing else. It certainly changes how I read the Gospels now without question. Stay tuned, more scholarly analysis coming up as I have time.
God Is Odd: Exploring Theology(s) Dictums 
I’m confused, you say “there are many more scholars stepping up to the plate” but many of the scholars you list have been around for decades? None of this is necessarily new…?
There are also an equal number of exceptional scholars who support the general historicity of the Gospels, such as John P. Meier. You seem to be reading to reinforce a preexisting opinion instead of reading for general enlightenment, which is what you criticized in yourself as a Mormon apologist.